What if Lincoln had not been assassinated?

[suarezguy]

If he had finished his presidency? How do you think he would have deal with the defeated Confederate states? Pretty much any way of dealing with them would probably be more controversial than just he would have done good/right/better than his successors. And especially if he had lived for decades more, would he have resisted, prevented the Republicans growing less interested in, eventually abandoning the freed slaves or was that pretty inevitable, nearly the whole country choosing to abandon them?

And what would his economic approaches and policies be like? Would his Presidency, at least the second term of it be regarded, like Grant's presidency later actually was, as the start of the Gilded Age? Or would the continuing association with the greatness of the first term lend that whole era a less negative appraisal than just Gilded Age, more like Best of times, Worst of times, both greatness and pilfering rather than mostly just pilfering?

I think he would generally be regarded more like, closer to Jefferson and/or Grant or FDR than Washington, though still pretty close to Washington, at least widely regarded as still being in top 5 presidents with many still regarding him as still second best or even still best.

 

[Miss Chicken]

I don’t know enough about Lincoln, or US history in general to answer this, sorry about that, but I am eagerly waiting for replies. I love What Ifs.

 

[MarcKyle1964]

Harry Turtledove has joined the chat.

 

[MarcKyle1964]

If he had finished his presidency? How do you think he would have deal with the defeated Confederate states? Pretty much any way of dealing with them would probably be more controversial than just he would have done good/right/better than his successors. And especially if he had lived for decades more, would he have resisted, prevented the Republicans growing less interested in, eventually abandoning the freed slaves or was that pretty inevitable, nearly the whole country choosing to abandon them?

And what would his economic approaches and policies be like? Would his Presidency, at least the second term of it be regarded, like Grant's presidency later actually was, as the start of the Gilded Age? Or would the continuing association with the greatness of the first term lend that whole era a less negative appraisal than just Gilded Age, more like Best of times, Worst of times, both greatness and pilfering rather than mostly just pilfering?

I think he would generally be regarded more like, closer to Jefferson and/or Grant or FDR than Washington, though still pretty close to Washington, at least widely regarded as still being in top 5 presidents with many still regarding him as still second best or even still best.

I agree, but I wonder if his failing health (Marfans) and the strain evident on photographs of his face would have led to him dying or becoming debilitated in his second term, bringing Johnson in anyway.

 

[at Quark's]

I guess he would have been dead by now, regardless.

Though the Trump administration might claim he still receives social security payments.

Other than that, I can't really tell; as a non-American I don't know enough about American society and American history, but I agree it's an interesting question.

 

[Ovation]

If he had finished his presidency? How do you think he would have deal with the defeated Confederate states? Pretty much any way of dealing with them would probably be more controversial than just he would have done good/right/better than his successors. And especially if he had lived for decades more, would he have resisted, prevented the Republicans growing less interested in, eventually abandoning the freed slaves or was that pretty inevitable, nearly the whole country choosing to abandon them?

And what would his economic approaches and policies be like? Would his Presidency, at least the second term of it be regarded, like Grant's presidency later actually was, as the start of the Gilded Age? Or would the continuing association with the greatness of the first term lend that whole era a less negative appraisal than just Gilded Age, more like Best of times, Worst of times, both greatness and pilfering rather than mostly just pilfering?

I think he would generally be regarded more like, closer to Jefferson and/or Grant or FDR than Washington, though still pretty close to Washington, at least widely regarded as still being in top 5 presidents with many still regarding him as still second best or even still best.

Don’t have time for a deep dive but the single biggest immediate difference would have been Reconstruction. The “radical” version that actually occurred was only possible because Lincoln was gone and Johnson couldn’t prevent it. It’s possible Reconstruction would have persisted more effectively than in reality but, perhaps, at the expense of some its most idealistic elements (elements that suffered reversals but also served as inspiration to following generations of civil rights movements). It’s also possible, even likely, that further assassination attempts would have occurred. Resentment towards Lincoln ran quite high (and was not exclusively rooted in the South).

If I have time later, I might have a few more thoughts on the matter. I used to teach this period of history fairly often at my previous school (it’s been quite a while now, sadly).

 

[BillJ]

He would've become a vampire hunter.

 

[Spock's Ghost]

He wouldn't be on the penny or the five dollar bill.

 

[Ovation]

He wouldn't be on the penny or the five dollar bill.

You may be right but the others on the bills and coins were not assassinated, so…

 

[XCV330]

Lincoln would have handled reconstruction better. The damage Andrew Johnson caused is hard to even quantify. Would Lincoln have felt the need for a third term like FDR? Probably not but there was only precedent keeping him from doing so. The southern states would have kept republican legislatures longer, and this might have prevented the initial rise of the Klan and Jim Crow, long term.

If Seward had survived the same conspiracy that in this timeline didn't kill Lincoln, than the Alaska purchase probably would have gone on. Lincoln was a child of the frontier. He knew what gaining Alaska meant, and Russia had supported the Union in the war, when other countries were willing to stand by and let America annihilate itself (or sell warships to the south). We really should avoid presidents named Johnson. History has shut the lid on that. Sorry not sorry Mike.

 

[MarcKyle1964]

You may be right but the others on the bills and coins were not assassinated, so…

Kennedy on the fifty cent piece was.

 

[Ovation]

Kennedy on the fifty cent piece was.

And? Far more who were not assassinated are also on money, while some who were are not on money. Assassination is not an automatic path to commemoration by currency. And that’s the only point being made.